On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 00:07:54 +0100 Baruch Even wrote: > Francesco Poli wrote: > > I think that the severity of this bug is not properly set. > > Being a severe violation of Debian policy, it should be raised to > > severity 'serious', I would say. > > I agree that by normal standards this bug should be considered > serious. But I do not want to stop the version from reaching testing > just because of this issue. It doesn't make sense the make the package > unusable (as it is in 1.2) because the docs are under the GFDL. > > I still hope that the GFDL issue will be resolved and I won't need to > take out the docs from the package. > > If it does get to that I will remove the docs from the package, I > filed the bug against my package to serve as a reminder to myself that > it still needs to be handled.
I think it *does* need to be handled: http://release.debian.org/removing-non-free-documentation And it should be handled beginning from now: delaying its solving could mean ending up with a documentation-less package when etch is out... -- :-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-) ...................................................................... Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4 Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpRXAITFq02M.pgp
Description: PGP signature
